"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"Carter, K8VT" wrote in message
om...
David Eduardo wrote:


You are so quick to say something nasty about others, but when you
make an absolutely stupid error yourself, you accuse others of being
wrong.


Well, no surprise here...this has been his standard modus operandi for
years.

I hate to think of how many stations he has reported to that he has
offended.

Well I do write a pretty mean reception report if I say so myself! My
return
rate on QSL's is actually quite high.

There is a DX fake in Italy who also gets high QSL returns despite the fact
he never heard most of the stations he has reported. Your statement proves
nothing.

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"Carter, K8VT" wrote in message
om...
David Eduardo wrote:


You are so quick to say something nasty about others, but when you
make an absolutely stupid error yourself, you accuse others of being
wrong.


Well, no surprise here...this has been his standard modus operandi for
years.

I hate to think of how many stations he has reported to that he has
offended.

Well I do write a pretty mean reception report if I say so myself! My
return
rate on QSL's is actually quite high.

There is a DX fake in Italy who also gets high QSL returns despite the fact
he never heard most of the stations he has reported. Your statement proves
nothing.

Here's a quote from your homepage, homeboy:

"The common goal of DXers was to receive letters or "QSL" cards verifying that
the reception did, in fact, occur."

http://www.davidgleason.com/

I guess whatever QSL's you may possess mean nothing as well.

LMFAO

dxAce
Michigan
USA

dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"Carter, K8VT" wrote in message
om...
David Eduardo wrote:


You are so quick to say something nasty about others, but when you
make an absolutely stupid error yourself, you accuse others of being
wrong.


Well, no surprise here...this has been his standard modus operandi for
years.

I hate to think of how many stations he has reported to that he has
offended.

Well I do write a pretty mean reception report if I say so myself! My
return
rate on QSL's is actually quite high.

There is a DX fake in Italy who also gets high QSL returns despite the fact
he never heard most of the stations he has reported. Your statement proves
nothing.

Here's a quote from your homepage, homeboy:

"The common goal of DXers was to receive letters or "QSL" cards verifying that
the reception did, in fact, occur."

http://www.davidgleason.com/

I guess whatever QSL's you may possess mean nothing as well.

What the heck, you might have just used that QSL printing press to print up a few
for yourself, eh?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

Here's a quote from your homepage, homeboy:

"The common goal of DXers was to receive letters or "QSL" cards verifying
that
the reception did, in fact, occur."

http://www.davidgleason.com/

I guess whatever QSL's you may possess mean nothing as well.

Note the keyword "was." I was referring to events of 45 years ago or so.
Today, the meaning of a QSL or verification has changed, due to the
internet, the decline of the hobby and other factors. Today, a QSL has lost
most of its value in proving reception, in fact.

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

Here's a quote from your homepage, homeboy:

"The common goal of DXers was to receive letters or "QSL" cards verifying
that
the reception did, in fact, occur."

http://www.davidgleason.com/

I guess whatever QSL's you may possess mean nothing as well.

Note the keyword "was." I was referring to events of 45 years ago or so.
Today, the meaning of a QSL or verification has changed, due to the
internet, the decline of the hobby and other factors. Today, a QSL has lost
most of its value in proving reception, in fact.

Your opinion of course.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

Here's a quote from your homepage, homeboy:

"The common goal of DXers was to receive letters or "QSL" cards
verifying
that
the reception did, in fact, occur."

http://www.davidgleason.com/

I guess whatever QSL's you may possess mean nothing as well.

Note the keyword "was." I was referring to events of 45 years ago or so.
Today, the meaning of a QSL or verification has changed, due to the
internet, the decline of the hobby and other factors. Today, a QSL has
lost
most of its value in proving reception, in fact.

Your opinion of course.

No, not an opinion. More like a consensus.

The value of a QSL is related to the value of a reception report. In the
past, a report could not be generated and send in a timely form without
actually hearing a stations. Today, web pages with streaming, tunable remote
web receivers, and easy and cheap telephone connections make a reception
report easy to make without ever having to hear a radio station on (one of)
its frequency (ies). In the 60's, the only doubt involved MW DX reports
that could be faked by listening to the same station on SW. Today, nearly
every report on every station could be suspect as there are more and easy
ways to hear stations that do not involve the use of a radio and aerial.

For this reason, many DXers have ceased to report DX (in part, of course,
due to cost, low response, etc., also). Many of us prefer recordings to QSLs
and find it more entertaining to listen to a CD of catches than to look at
slips of cardboard called QSLs.

In the days when I was most active in reporting, I got above 2300
verifications from 87 countries, on MW. Today, I do not report at all.